I forgott to mention something, Nintendo is the only consol manufacturer that at least I know about that have made 5 consols in a row and made profit all the way. So Nintendo is clearly a part of the consol industry.

Shane said: The past does not negate the PS3's problems, at least not entirely. However, this isn't the N64 here. Sony still has every developer onboard because of its past, albeit less exclusively than before, while Microsoft's having to fight for developers and Nintendo's just getting crappy ports and cash ins, also because of the past (Nintendo's hardware isn't helping it any). Long-term success trumps short-term success.

You should find my old thread about "Why PS3 isn't N64."

The big difference is that Nintendo alienated developers, and Sony alienated consumers. Thing is, developers will still rush out the door if Sony doesn't put up sales. And they can't put up sales without a lower price and a killer app. And they've only got one killer app in-house.

BTW, earlier when I said that Nintendo would force Sony and MSs hand, I didn't mean they would release a console earlier, but that their dominance this generation would force Sony and MS out the door early.

Erik Aston said:   BTW, earlier when I said that Nintendo would force Sony and MSs hand, I didn't mean they would release a console earlier, but that their dominance this generation would force Sony and MS out the door early.

 Erik,

          So you think the Big N has a solid chance at ousting MS and Sony all together in the console world? 

 

Nintendo may have established the industry, but that hasn't mattered in over a decade. They lost their grip and have proven to not know a way to get it back. The bleeding looks to have finally stopped, but the damage is done. The PS1 did have its advantages over the PS3, but it also had its disadvantages. I disagree. Nintendo had plenty of third party love on the Cube. At the end of 2002, Gamecube had 156 third party games. If Wii surpasses that, it won't be by much. Cube had plenty of support. What it lacked was support that would move systems, and their own internal games have definitely lost a step. As I said, they still don't have an exclusive (or even a multiplatform game for that matter) the likes of Resident Evil that they did have at this point on that system, though. A look at the monthly history shows that Sony almost always moves 2-3+ million units in the US in the month of December. For the PS2, this amounted to 11 million units, just shy of the total amount of Gamecubes sold during its lifespan. This is why when people are jumping up and down about how Nintendo moved 300k during February, I'm more interested in seeing what the holidays look like. Nintendo definitely knows how to make a profit, which is a viable strategy but not cutthroat enough for my tastes. I viewed Wii as a bit of white flag waving, but we'll see how long they can go before costs become too much for them to even do something like this. Sony's been a target, but it's always been a target. Based on PS2 software and hardware sales, people are obviously still buying Sony products, so I don't see how they alienated customers. No doubt PS3 would be doing better if it had a lower price, but that's nothing that... lowering the price can't fix. The thing about PS3 is that all developers just assumed that it would be #1, and most of them continue to assume so. With that, they've gotten so far into development of their AAA titles that they can't just scrap them, so they will be coming out on PS3. If the world ends and FFXIII fails to sell on a Sony system, then there's a door opening as far as future versions, but we're talking a couple years off. At most, in terms of current major products, all they can do is put them multiplatform (meaning Xbox 360). Best case scenario for Nintendo on the major franchises is spinoffs and last gen porting. Microsoft wants shorter lifecycles anyway. They're using this as a way to get an upperhand, and it certainly worked this time in terms of stealing exclusives from Sony and also just having a higher userbase by the time the others launched. Sony will go on its own terms. They invested too much into PS3 to just drop it in 3 years.

Shane said: Nintendo may have established the industry, but that hasn't mattered in over a decade. They lost their grip and have proven to not know a way to get it back. The bleeding looks to have finally stopped, but the damage is done. The PS1 did have its advantages over the PS3, but it also had its disadvantages. I disagree. Nintendo had plenty of third party love on the Cube. At the end of 2002, Gamecube had 156 third party games. If Wii surpasses that, it won't be by much. Cube had plenty of support. What it lacked was support that would move systems, and their own internal games have definitely lost a step. As I said, they still don't have an exclusive (or even a multiplatform game for that matter) the likes of Resident Evil that they did have at this point on that system, though. A look at the monthly history shows that Sony almost always moves 2-3+ million units in the US in the month of December. For the PS2, this amounted to 11 million units, just shy of the total amount of Gamecubes sold during its lifespan. This is why when people are jumping up and down about how Nintendo moved 300k during February, I'm more interested in seeing what the holidays look like. Nintendo definitely knows how to make a profit, which is a viable strategy but not cutthroat enough for my tastes. I viewed Wii as a bit of white flag waving, but we'll see how long they can go before costs become too much for them to even do something like this. Sony's been a target, but it's always been a target. Based on PS2 software and hardware sales, people are obviously still buying Sony products, so I don't see how they alienated customers. No doubt PS3 would be doing better if it had a lower price, but that's nothing that... lowering the price can't fix. The thing about PS3 is that all developers just assumed that it would be #1, and most of them continue to assume so. With that, they've gotten so far into development of their AAA titles that they can't just scrap them, so they will be coming out on PS3. If the world ends and FFXIII fails to sell on a Sony system, then there's a door opening as far as future versions, but we're talking a couple years off. At most, in terms of current major products, all they can do is put them multiplatform (meaning Xbox 360). Best case scenario for Nintendo on the major franchises is spinoffs and last gen porting. Microsoft wants shorter lifecycles anyway. They're using this as a way to get an upperhand, and it certainly worked this time in terms of stealing exclusives from Sony and also just having a higher userbase by the time the others launched. Sony will go on its own terms. They invested too much into PS3 to just drop it in 3 years.

For your comment on amazing sales for the Playstation Brand I just want to point out the ratio of systems sold in Q4 as compared to the full year for 2002 to 2005:

PS2 2002	54.40%
PS2 2003	48.80%
PS2 2004	43.40%
PS2 2005	41.24%
GC 2002	53.93%
GC 2003	65.85%
GC 2004	53.93%
GC 2005	57.62%
Xbox 2002	52.71%
Xbox 2003	54.40%
Xbox 2004	50.47%
Xbox 2005	32.55%

So as a rough guestimate 40% to 60% of your systems sales will happen in the last quarter of the year. Using this and current sales data the Wii will sell between 5.75 to 8.65 Million systems, the XBox 360 will sell between 3.95 and 5.90 Million systems, and the PS3 will sell between 2.75 and 4.06 Million systems in 2007. There is nothing magical about the Playstation brand ... It sold more units in the holiday period because it was more popular and sold more units throughout the rest of the year.

@Shane You have some good points there. Yes, the PS3 will get some good 3rd party games for a while now, because 3rd parties investments on a console, which they thought would be a blockbuster, are too high for stepping back. But this doesn't mean that the projects COULDN'T be cancelled or moved somewhere to distant future. Also the risk of exclusives going multiplatform is quite big. I disagree on most 3rd party developers assuming PS3 being #1 eventually. Anyway if they would think so, they would still need to make money until that happens. And they do need to start focusing on quality on Wii games, because someone will focus anyway. Crappy ports are indeed Wiis problem, because 3rd parties thought that Wii wouldn't sell big amounts, so they realized too late that how Wii would sell. But Wii is also getting a lot of (better) quality 3rd party titles, thing you shouldn't forget. Bad 3rd party support on Nintendo last gen does have an influence with contracts made with 3rd party, but only for a short while anymore. If Wii starts to dominate this gen, then 360 and PS3 gets ports from Wii games, so if Wii gets spinoffs, that would mean that the spinoff would be the major francise (for example Mario series). Sony did invest too much money on PS3 to drop it in 3 years, but if it doesn't make but loss, it would be wise thing to do either drop the console business or move to next gen ASAP. Just like M$ did because they were losing so much money on Xbox. Yes, you could think Wii as white flag waving, or something really disruptive, with what you really gamble (it's a shitty situation if it fails, but if it succeeds, you really smash the competitors). GC 3rd party titles are a little different thing, there wasn't much of anything, that PS2 wouldn't offer and besides, PS2 was a lot more popular, so 3rd parties were interested in PS2. If we look at 3rd party titles on GC at the end of 2002 and compare them to PS2:s third party titles at the end of 2002, which one has the most?

Shane said: Nintendo may have established the industry, but that hasn't mattered in over a decade. They lost their grip and have proven to not know a way to get it back. The bleeding looks to have finally stopped, but the damage is done. The PS1 did have its advantages over the PS3, but it also had its disadvantages. I disagree. Nintendo had plenty of third party love on the Cube. At the end of 2002, Gamecube had 156 third party games. If Wii surpasses that, it won't be by much. Cube had plenty of support. What it lacked was support that would move systems, and their own internal games have definitely lost a step. As I said, they still don't have an exclusive (or even a multiplatform game for that matter) the likes of Resident Evil that they did have at this point on that system, though. A look at the monthly history shows that Sony almost always moves 2-3+ million units in the US in the month of December. For the PS2, this amounted to 11 million units, just shy of the total amount of Gamecubes sold during its lifespan. This is why when people are jumping up and down about how Nintendo moved 300k during February, I'm more interested in seeing what the holidays look like. Nintendo definitely knows how to make a profit, which is a viable strategy but not cutthroat enough for my tastes. I viewed Wii as a bit of white flag waving, but we'll see how long they can go before costs become too much for them to even do something like this. Sony's been a target, but it's always been a target. Based on PS2 software and hardware sales, people are obviously still buying Sony products, so I don't see how they alienated customers. No doubt PS3 would be doing better if it had a lower price, but that's nothing that... lowering the price can't fix. The thing about PS3 is that all developers just assumed that it would be #1, and most of them continue to assume so. With that, they've gotten so far into development of their AAA titles that they can't just scrap them, so they will be coming out on PS3. If the world ends and FFXIII fails to sell on a Sony system, then there's a door opening as far as future versions, but we're talking a couple years off. At most, in terms of current major products, all they can do is put them multiplatform (meaning Xbox 360). Best case scenario for Nintendo on the major franchises is spinoffs and last gen porting. Microsoft wants shorter lifecycles anyway. They're using this as a way to get an upperhand, and it certainly worked this time in terms of stealing exclusives from Sony and also just having a higher userbase by the time the others launched. Sony will go on its own terms. They invested too much into PS3 to just drop it in 3 years.

 

So let us start from the top:

1. So they haven't proven that they know a way back, when their new system is selling better than their previous. When the new system is sold out in all three regions. When their new system has sold half of the cubes LTD in Japan and almost the same thing in EU?
2. What disadvnatage did PS1 have that PS3 didn't?
3. They don't need 3rd party software to drive sales, Wii Sport and Play stands for the system selling now. But if you really want to know, I do think that DQ: Swords can move some systems. Looking at it, the problem for Nintendo isn't the system seller, the problem is lack of games. I do think Wii will beat the Cube in 3rd software support without any problem because Nintendo will win Japan. They know the market, how could you otherwise explain the DS?
4. Any succesfull system will sell more during december,  if Nintendo Wii continue to dominate the sales monthly we will see Wii sell 3-4 million during december also. Just because Sony has in the past sold well during december, that doesn't mean that they always will. PS2 is usually selling much better the rest of the ordinary month than the PS3 is selling now.
5. Ehh Nintendo has no loans, hasn't shown a year were they made a loss since the NES era. That isn't enough cuttroath for you? How much profit must a company show?
6. If sony cut their price with 100 USD each year (and that is a lot) they will hit 300 USD in 2009, Nintendo need to lower their price with 100 USD to reach 150 USD. Meanwhile Nintendo is selling their system with a profit today, sony is losing. I am working with cost-reduction, you don't reduce you price during one year with 10% without volumes, something Sony doesn't have for the moment.
7. Yes 3rd parties assumed that PS3 would be number one, so far it isn't happen. They game that is started in development will be realised, sometimes later than plant just to wait for a big enough userbase, but their is no new 3rd party exclusivs announced since launch. Where is the support? Some of the 3rd party exclusives is even going too xbox360. Meanwhile Nintendo isn't getting the biggest titles but they are getting more and more exclusivs. 3rd party support isn't static, if it was Nintendo wouldn't have lost against Sony from the start.
8. No Microsoft doesn't want shorter life cycles, they killed the xbox because they were losing tons of money on it. It is pretty clear that Microsoft needs to show some profit this generation if they are going to launch a xbox720 (or whatever), something that they have failed so far with.

Finaly I want to point out that you are making an assumption that is building on, as far as I see it, a wrong idéa. That is, PS1 and PS2 had great software support therefore PS3 will have it. It isn't that simple, becuase you get 3rd party support if you can show a userbase, something the PS3 have failed with so far. So 3rd party support wont be there, at least when it comes to exclusive games if the sales isn't there. Nintendo is selling on its first party studios, Sony has so far failed to do that.

bdbdbd said: If Wii starts to dominate this gen, then 360 and PS3 gets ports from Wii games, so if Wii gets spinoffs, that would mean that the spinoff would be the major francise (for example Mario series).  Sony did invest too much money on PS3 to drop it in 3 years, but if it doesn't make but loss, it would be wise thing to do either drop the console business or move to next gen ASAP. Just like M$ did because they were losing so much money on Xbox.

 there will never bee wii ports, wii hardware is so weak no PS3 or 360 owner would buy a game on their system that was designed for the weak hardware of the wii.

Sony would never drop PS3 support, they sure as hell are not MS.   Thir game divison recovery is happening already..

Nintendo may have established the industry, but that hasn't mattered in over a decade. They lost their grip and have proven to not know a way to get it back. The bleeding looks to have finally stopped, but the damage is done.

Wii has now sold 45% of GCs LTD in non-NA regions. Clearly, Nintendo is back.

The PS1 did have its advantages over the PS3, but it also had its disadvantages.

I disagree. Nintendo had plenty of third party love on the Cube. At the end of 2002, Gamecube had 156 third party games. If Wii surpasses that, it won't be by much. Cube had plenty of support. What it lacked was support that would move systems, and their own internal games have definitely lost a step. As I said, they still don't have an exclusive (or even a multiplatform game for that matter) the likes of Resident Evil that they did have at this point on that system, though.

Nintendo had a lot of multiplatform games early. When XBox outperformed GC in NA, and multiplat games (sports, racing, WWII games, etc) did better on it, those games disappeared. Also, Resident Evil was announced for PS2 before debuting on GC, killing its exclusivity advantage.

If Nintendo has less 3rd party games, they will have far more exclusives, by the end of 2007.

A look at the monthly history shows that Sony almost always moves 2-3+ million units in the US in the month of December. For the PS2, this amounted to 11 million units, just shy of the total amount of Gamecubes sold during its lifespan. This is why when people are jumping up and down about how Nintendo moved 300k during February, I'm more interested in seeing what the holidays look like.

Do you understand how this industry works? Xmas sales are easily predictable based on yearly sales. Wii will outsell PS3 in all regions this Xmas.

Nintendo definitely knows how to make a profit, which is a viable strategy but not cutthroat enough for my tastes. I viewed Wii as a bit of white flag waving, but we'll see how long they can go before costs become too much for them to even do something like this.

First of all, making a profit is not a strategy, it is a goal. The only throat that Sony and MS are cutting is their own. Second, the one company making money is certainly not the one that has to worry the most about ongoing high costs.

Nintendo waved the white flag in 2002, when Iwata left. Wii is a new battle. However, Nintendo was in a position after GC that they could have played for 2 more generations with financial disaster consoles like XBox. They are such a financially sound company, that they were never in danger of leaving the console war, and with the kind of profits they're making now, its clear they'll have no problem launching 6th and 7th home consoles.

Sony's been a target, but it's always been a target. Based on PS2 software and hardware sales, people are obviously still buying Sony products, so I don't see how they alienated customers. No doubt PS3 would be doing better if it had a lower price, but that's nothing that... lowering the price can't fix.

Obviously they've alienated customers from the PS3, not PS2. They're not even going to sell 10 million units before the end of this year.

And Sony is in no place to be cutting the price. If PS3 is as difficult to cost reduce as PS2 was, it will finally reach the Wii's launch price near the end of its life. ($300:$130::$600:$260).

The thing about PS3 is that all developers just assumed that it would be #1, and most of them continue to assume so. With that, they've gotten so far into development of their AAA titles that they can't just scrap them, so they will be coming out on PS3. If the world ends and FFXIII fails to sell on a Sony system, then there's a door opening as far as future versions, but we're talking a couple years off. At most, in terms of current major products, all they can do is put them multiplatform (meaning Xbox 360). Best case scenario for Nintendo on the major franchises is spinoffs and last gen porting.

So you're saying that PS3 has to hope that "current major products" will be enough to give them an advantage, because Nintendo is already outselling them based on "spinoffs and last gen porting," making it inevitable that "the major franchises" will come "a couple years off."

Microsoft wants shorter lifecycles anyway. They're using this as a way to get an upperhand, and it certainly worked this time in terms of stealing exclusives from Sony and also just having a higher userbase by the time the others launched. Sony will go on its own terms. They invested too much into PS3 to just drop it in 3 years.

No company wants short lifecycles. If they're still losing money on PS3 in 3 years, and they've obviously lost the war, they'll have to launch a new system early. They simply won't have another choice.

Hus said: bdbdbd said: If Wii starts to dominate this gen, then 360 and PS3 gets ports from Wii games, so if Wii gets spinoffs, that would mean that the spinoff would be the major francise (for example Mario series).  Sony did invest too much money on PS3 to drop it in 3 years, but if it doesn't make but loss, it would be wise thing to do either drop the console business or move to next gen ASAP. Just like M$ did because they were losing so much money on Xbox.  there will never bee wii ports, wii hardware is so weak no PS3 or 360 owner would buy a game on their system that was designed for the weak hardware of the wii. Sony would never drop PS3 support, they sure as hell are not MS.   Thir game divison recovery is happening already..

Yes Hus, if there wouldn't be any ports, this would mean 3rd party support for 360 and PS3 being as good as GC had. In fact, the closest console having equal 3rd party support compared to competitors, would be NES. The thing, that Sony is upping its first party support, also means that it's also upping its costs, which means that if PS3 (and/or PSP) doesn't sell good enough, they either have to drive 1st party down or start making 3rd party games for competitors. Oh yes Sony will drop PS3 support as soon as PS4 starts to look like more profitable option. If PS3 doesn't sell good enough, in 2009 or 2010 at latest, Sonys main focus will be PS4 (if they plan to release it).